I recently got to thinking about how much Hendrix material has been released as "new" since his death in 1970. I feel like it's just a cash grab. Not a mean-spirited plot to bastardize his talent for money, but coincidentally a goldmine of wealth that comes from the fact that he recorded a monolithic amount of music. To put it to two extremes, would you rather have no "new" Jimi Hendrix? Or do you enjoy having this last bit of him to hold on to 44 years after the fact?

Mainly because artists evolve, and Hendrix definitely would've changed with the times, probably ahead of the curve. Every album that gets released from his old sessions is merely a snapshot of where he was at when he was in his 20s.

yeah there's an overwhelming amount of it. i've got Valleys Of Neptune, which is fairly good but doesn't touch the Experience albums. even by Electric Ladyland, it seemed like he was moving away from the 3 minute rock song and more into extended jams.

i've read that years ago stuff was getting released that was minimal Hendrix and lots of overdubs, but I think his family are in control of the releases these days, so as long as the masters are in decent condition, the quality is reasonable and they're not tinkering with it stupidly, I'm okay with more releases.

Truthfully, I'm not really opposed to all the albums being put out. However, them being labelled as Hendrix albums just doesn't
sit quite right with me. Maybe if it were made clear that he didn't have full creative input or control, or something along those
lines.

People, Hell and Angels was pretty good, haven't listened to much other of his post-humuous stuff. It should be released but in like a complete recordings or something instead of like another album every year